DeedProof

Protect a property
← All states

Law library

Squatters and vacant property in Pennsylvania: what the law says

In Pennsylvania a squatter is not a tenant. That sounds like good news for an owner and it is not: the fast eviction track exists only for tenants, so being owed nothing by a landlord-tenant law also means getting nothing from it. What is left is a full civil lawsuit. Every answer below is quoted from the statute it came from.

Every answer on this page is quoted from the statute it came from and linked to the source, so you can read the law yourself. Last checked against the statutes on 2026-07-14.

What to do now — this part is ours, not the law

There is no 30-day rule. Nobody becomes a tenant by standing in your house long enough — not in thirty days, not in ninety. They are not a tenant on day one and they are not a tenant on day ninety. What time does change is how hard they are to remove, and how much of your money it takes. That is a reason to move today, not a deadline you have already missed.

If someone is in the property right now

  1. Do not go in, and do not change the locks. It is the first thing everyone wants to do and it is how the owner becomes the defendant. Read that question above before you touch anything.
  2. Call the police non-emergency line. Ask them to look at it as a criminal trespass rather than a landlord–tenant dispute. Those are different outcomes and the words matter.
  3. Have your proof of ownership in your hand when they arrive — the deed, a recent tax bill, your ID. The officer's whole decision turns on whether he believes you own it.
  4. Photograph everything, and write down every date. When you last saw it empty. When you found them. What was said. Who you called, and when.
  5. Call a lawyer the same day. Not next week. The clock on every route above has already started.
The full checklist — what to record and what to ask →

If it has not happened yet

Everything on this page gets easier the earlier you do it. Photograph the property empty, keep the utility bills, and write down who is allowed inside — before you lock up and walk away. None of that is expensive. All of it is worth more than it looks at 2am.

The checklist for leaving a property vacant →

Is a squatter a tenant — and what rights do they have?

No, and since 2024 the law says so outright — they have none of a tenant's protections. It cuts both ways: the Act that would have shielded them is the same Act that would have given you the fast eviction track.

›Read the law

If a trespasser counts as a tenant, the owner is routed into housing court and every fast option closes.

Act 88 of 2024 (SB 1236), amending the Landlord and Tenant Act of 1951

“Section 603. Applicability.--This act shall not apply to a person who is not, nor ever has been, a tenant.”

Act 88 did two things. The narrow one is § 501(g) — the notice-to-quit requirement does not apply to a non-tenant. The sweeping one is this NEW § 603, which disapplies the entire Act. Note what it does NOT do: it creates no removal procedure and no affidavit mechanism. Several property-manager and realtor sources describe Act 88 as 'how landlords can remove a squatter', implying a faster route. No such route appears in the text. Read with Assouline (below), Act 88 appears to CONFIRM that the fast track is closed, not to open one.

Read it at the source →

Can I just change the locks?

Don't — and be clear that this is us, not the statute. Philadelphia bans lockouts outright. Everywhere else in Pennsylvania the anti-lockout rules we could find are written about tenants, and no appellate court has decided whether they reach a squatter at all. Untested is not the same as permitted, and the person who finds out which it is will be the defendant.

›Read the law — 3 provisions

Lawful in a handful of states, a crime in most. Getting this wrong turns the victim into the defendant.

1 · Phila. Code § 9-1603 — Unlawful Self-Help Eviction Actions Prohibited · secondhand source

“(1) No landlord or landlord's agent may engage in self-help eviction practices, as defined in Section 9-1602 of this Chapter, under any circumstances, in the City of Philadelphia. The requisite, legal process for lawful eviction must consist of execution of a judgment of possession entered by a court of competent jurisdiction in accordance with State law. Lawful execution of judgment may be performed only by a Sheriff or court-appointed landlord and tenant officer.”

SECONDARY: amlegal.com blocks automated retrieval, so this text was read through a rendering proxy and an Internet Archive snapshot of the same page rather than fetched directly. It should be confirmed by a human against the live ordinance before it is relied on. The URL is also a '/latest/' link, which means it will point at amended text without warning.

Read it at the source →

2 · Act 88 of 2024, new § 603 of the Landlord and Tenant Act

“Section 603. Applicability.--This act shall not apply to a person who is not, nor ever has been, a tenant.”

Read it at the source →

3 · Kuriger v. Cramer, 498 A.2d 1331 (Pa. Super. 1985), n.14 · secondhand source

“No Pennsylvania appellate decision has addressed the question of whether a landlord's use of self-help, rather than legal process, to evict a tenant may give rise to a cause of action in trespass by the tenant against the landlord.”

SECONDARY: read through an Internet Archive snapshot; Justia and CourtListener block automated retrieval. Verify against the reporter before relying on it.

Read it at the source →

These are the provisions, in order. We have not drawn a conclusion from them — that is not ours to draw.

If police do act, what is the charge — and can they arrest for it?

It depends which charge the officer writes. Call it criminal trespass and it is a felony — he can arrest on the spot. Call it defiant trespass and it is usually just a ticket, unless you personally told them to leave. A ticket leaves them in the house.

›Read the law — 4 provisions

A charge that only supports a citation does not remove anyone from a house. This is the link that killed the previous market.

1 · 18 Pa.C.S. § 3503(a) — Criminal trespass: buildings

“(1) A person commits an offense if, knowing that he is not licensed or privileged to do so, he: (i) enters, gains entry by subterfuge or surreptitiously remains in any building or occupied structure or separately secured or occupied portion thereof; or (ii) breaks into any building or occupied structure or separately secured or occupied portion thereof. (2) An offense under paragraph (1)(i) is a felony of the third degree, and an offense under paragraph (1)(ii) is a felony of the second degree.”

§ 3503(c)(1) supplies a DEFENCE to this subsection: 'a building or occupied structure involved in an offense under subsection (a) of this section was abandoned.' A vacant building is not an abandoned one — but the distinction becomes an element the case turns on, at precisely the kind of property this concerns.

Read it at the source →

2 · 18 Pa.C.S. § 3503(b) — Defiant trespasser, and its grading

“(2) Except as provided in paragraph (1)(v), an offense under this subsection constitutes a misdemeanor of the third degree if the offender defies an order to leave personally communicated to him by the owner of the premises or other authorized person. An offense under paragraph (1)(v) constitutes a misdemeanor of the first degree. Otherwise it is a summary offense.”

This is the fork. The same person in the same house is a felony under subsection (a) and, on the residual clause of subsection (b), a SUMMARY OFFENSE — which is a citation. Which branch is taken at the door is not decided by the statute.

Read it at the source →

3 · Pa.R.Crim.P. 502 — Instituting proceedings in court cases

“Criminal proceedings in court cases shall be instituted by: (1) filing a written complaint; or (2) an arrest without a warrant: (a) when the offense is a murder, felony, or misdemeanor committed in the presence of the police officer making the arrest; or (b) upon probable cause when the offense is a felony or murder; or (c) upon probable cause when the offense is a misdemeanor not committed in the presence of the police officer making the arrest, when such arrest without a warrant is specifically authorized by statute.”

Read it at the source →

4 · Pa.R.Crim.P. 402 and 42 Pa.C.S. § 8902 — arrest without warrant, summary offenses

“Rule 402: Law enforcement officers shall ordinarily institute summary proceedings by citation. — 42 Pa.C.S. § 8902(a): For any of the following offenses, a police officer shall, upon view, have the right of arrest without warrant upon probable cause when there is ongoing conduct that imperils the personal security of any person or endangers public or private property: (1) Under Title 18 … when such offense constitutes a summary offense: 18 Pa.C.S. § 5503 (relating to disorderly conduct). 18 Pa.C.S. § 5505 (relating to public drunkenness). 18 Pa.C.S. § 5507 (relating to obstructing highways and other public passages). 18 Pa.C.S. § 6308 (relating to purchase, consumption, possession or transportation of liquor …). (2) Violation of an ordinance of a city of the second class.”

18 Pa.C.S. § 3503 does not appear on that list. Note also the limit on § 8902(a)(2): it reaches ordinance violations only in a city of the second class — which is Pittsburgh, not Philadelphia, a city of the first class.

Read it at the source →

These are the provisions, in order. We have not drawn a conclusion from them — that is not ours to draw.

What decides whether police arrest or walk away?

Permission — whether the officer believes the person inside had it. To answer that he also has to know who owns the building, and the statute gives him no way to establish either one at the door. If the lease he has just been handed might be real, it is a civil matter and he leaves.

DeedProof solves this

We verify the deed against your identity, have you swear before a notary that nobody may enter, and file it where police can check it — so both halves of that question already have an answer. How it works →

›Read the law — 2 provisions

Every other question here is downstream of this one. The whole encounter, in one decision, made in a doorway in the dark.

1 · 18 Pa.C.S. § 3503 — the words both offenses hinge on

“(a)(1) A person commits an offense if, knowing that he is not licensed or privileged to do so, he: (i) enters, gains entry by subterfuge or surreptitiously remains … (b)(1) A person commits an offense if, knowing that he is not licensed or privileged to do so, he enters or remains in any place as to which notice against trespass is given …”

Read it at the source →

2 · 18 Pa.C.S. § 3503(c) — Defenses

“It is a defense to prosecution under this section that: (1) a building or occupied structure involved in an offense under subsection (a) of this section was abandoned; … or (3) the actor reasonably believed that the owner of the premises, or other person empowered to license access thereto, would have licensed him to enter or remain.”

Read (c)(3) again. A lease produced at the door is an attempt to establish exactly that defense. And read (c)(1): a vacant building is not an abandoned one, but a person facing a felony has every reason to argue that it was.

Read it at the source →

These are the provisions, in order. We have not drawn a conclusion from them — that is not ours to draw.

What is the lawful way to get them out?

Ejectment, in the Court of Common Pleas — a full civil lawsuit. The fast eviction track is not open to you: the Supreme Court has held it exists only for landlords and tenants, and a squatter is neither.

›Read the law — 3 provisions

The route sets the real cost. A summary track is weeks; a full civil suit is months.

1 · Assouline v. Reynolds, 219 A.3d 1131 (Pa. 2019) — Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

“In short, the Act governs the rights and duties of landlords and tenants. Thus, it is plain to us that the jurisdictional grant in 42 Pa.C.S. § 1515(a)(2) over '[m]atters arising under' the Act confines MDJs to matters arising between landlords and tenants.”

Read it at the source →

2 · Assouline v. Reynolds, n.13

“Outside of the landlord-tenant context, however, an action in ejectment is the appropriate vehicle for those dispossessed of property to seek possession of it, Siskos v. Britz, 790 A.2d 1000, 1006 (Pa. 2002) ('Ejectment is an action filed by a plaintiff who does not possess the land but has the right to possess it, against a defendant who has actual possession.'), and jurisdiction to hear and determine ejectment actions is vested in the courts of common pleas.”

Read it at the source →

3 · Pa.R.C.P. 1051 — Action in ejectment

“Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, the procedure in the action of ejectment shall be in accordance with the rules relating to a civil action.”

Philadelphia is the exception, and it matters: Phila. Code § 10-840(5) provides that on an ejectment complaint supported by an owner's affidavit and a motion for an emergency preliminary injunction, the court shall schedule a hearing within five business days. See the Philadelphia page.

Read it at the source →

These are the provisions, in order. We have not drawn a conclusion from them — that is not ours to draw.

How long does it take, and what does it cost?

Four to twelve months. And you never get the money back — not the court fees, and not your lawyer, which is the part nobody warns you about.

›Read the law — 2 provisions

The two numbers every owner wants, and the one nobody warns them about: you do not get it back.

1 · 42 Pa.C.S. § 1726(a)(1)

“Attorney's fees are not an item of taxable costs except to the extent authorized by section 2503.”

§ 2503 has no ejectment hook, and you have no contract with a squatter to put a fee-shifting clause into. This is the number nobody warns owners about: every dollar of it is gone.

Read it at the source →

2 · Philadelphia Code § 10-840(5) · secondhand source

“the Court shall schedule an emergency hearing within five (5) business days”

SECONDARY: amlegal blocks automated retrieval and this is a '/latest/' URL, so a human must confirm it against the live ordinance. The four-to-twelve-month range is a practitioner estimate — the First Judicial District publishes no ejectment duration data, and we will not invent one. The five-day accelerator is real, and it is why Philadelphia has its own page.

Read it at the source →

These are the provisions, in order. We have not drawn a conclusion from them — that is not ours to draw.

Can a sheriff remove them on the owner's affidavit alone, with no court?

No. Pennsylvania has no such law. A bill would create one — it has sat in committee since February 2025 without a vote.

›Read the law

Where a state has passed this, it hands the owner the whole mechanism for free. This field tracks the existential risk.

What we looked for: any Pennsylvania statute of the Florida § 82.035 type — an owner's sworn affidavit to law enforcement, followed by removal of the occupant without a court hearing

PA HB 530 (2025-26) — 'Homeowner Protection & Squatter Eviction Act', checked 2026-07-14

“§ 3503.1. Removal of trespassers from real property. (a) Authorization to remove.--A law enforcement officer having probable cause based on an affidavit under subsection (d) to believe that a person on real property has no lawful right of occupancy or entry on the real property or is trespassing in violation of section 3503 (relating to criminal trespass), may remove the person from the premises.”

HB 530 would ADD 18 Pa.C.S. § 3503.1 — and we confirmed by reading the current chapter that no such section exists. STATUS AS OF 2026-07-14: referred to the House Housing and Community Development Committee on 10 February 2025, and that is the only action of record. No committee vote, no floor vote. A companion, SB 195, has sat in Senate Judiciary since 29 January 2025. Both are alive until the session ends on 30 November 2026. Do not confuse either with Act 88 of 2024, which is a different kind of law entirely — it says a squatter is not a tenant; it creates no removal power.

Read it at the source →

How long before they can claim they own it?

21 years — or 10, if it is a single-family home on a lot of half an acre or less. Both clocks turn on the same thing: someone in actual, continuous, exclusive and visible possession of the building for the whole period. Note what the ten-year rule does not exempt — a vacant, investor-held or LLC-held property.

›Read the law — 3 provisions

The thing an owner of an empty building actually fears. Pure state statute.

1 · 42 Pa.C.S. § 5530 — Twenty-one year limitation

“(a) General rule.--The following actions and proceedings must be commenced within 21 years: (1) Except as provided in section 5527.1 (relating to ten year limitation), an action for the possession of real property.”

Read it at the source →

2 · 42 Pa.C.S. § 5527.1 — Ten year limitation (Act 34 of 2018)

“(a) Adverse possession.--Title to real property may be acquired after no less than 10 years of actual, continuous, exclusive, visible, notorious, distinct and hostile possession of the real property. … (h) Definitions … 'Real property.' Real estate not exceeding one-half acre in area that is: (1) Improved by a single-family dwelling that is and has been occupied by a possessor seeking title under this section for the full 10 years. (2) Identified as a separate lot in a recorded conveyance, recorded subdivision plan or recorded official map or plan of a municipality.”

Read the conditions carefully. The ten-year rule is gated on the LOT (half an acre or less, separately lotted, improved by a single-family dwelling) and on the POSSESSOR having occupied it for the full ten years. The text contains no exception for vacant, investor-held, or LLC-held property. An owner who believes they have twenty-one years may have ten. Excluded from the ten-year rule: condominiums, cooperatives, planned communities, and property owned by any government body.

Read it at the source →

3 · 42 Pa.C.S. § 5527.1(c)–(d)

“(c) Quiet title action required.--(1) A possessor who seeks to acquire title to real property under this section must, after meeting the requirements of subsections (a) and (b), commence a quiet title action and provide notice as required in this section. … (d) One-year notice.--(1) The record owners or their heirs, successors and assigns shall have one year in which to respond by commencing an action in ejectment against the possessor, which action disputes the claim of adverse possession.”

Read it at the source →

These are the provisions, in order. We have not drawn a conclusion from them — that is not ours to draw.

This page is the law. What it costs you in Pennsylvania — the filing fee, the sheriff’s bill, the months, and whether you ever see the money again.

Your deed proves you own it. It does not prove you never rented it.

That is the officer’s real question, and the lease in their hand does not contradict your deed. You can swear it is a forgery — but a statement you write the morning after, against a lease dated last year, is worth very little. The version that counts has to already exist.

How DeedProof verifies owners and files the affidavit in advance →

› Every source on this page (13)

Act 88 of 2024, new § 603 of the Landlord and Tenant ActPhila. Code § 9-1603 — Unlawful Self-Help Eviction Actions ProhibitedKuriger v. Cramer, 498 A.2d 1331 (Pa. Super. 1985), n.1418 Pa.C.S. § 3503(c) — DefensesPa.R.Crim.P. 502 — Instituting proceedings in court casesPa.R.Crim.P. 402 and 42 Pa.C.S. § 8902 — arrest without warrant, summary offensesAssouline v. Reynolds, n.13Pa.R.C.P. 1051 — Action in ejectment42 Pa.C.S. § 1726(a)(1)Philadelphia Code § 10-840(5)PA HB 530 (2025-26) — 'Homeowner Protection & Squatter Eviction Act', checked 2026-07-1442 Pa.C.S. § 5530 — Twenty-one year limitation42 Pa.C.S. § 5527.1(c)–(d)

DeedProof is not a law firm and this page is not legal advice. We cite primary sources; we do not interpret them for your situation. Laws change — confirm current requirements with the relevant government office or a licensed attorney.